The trial of embattled Fred Ajudua before Justice M.A. Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, could not proceed due to the defendant’s absence.
When the case was mentioned on Wednesday, July 23, Ajudua was absent in court due to health related reasons.
Justice Dada informed the parties that the court had received a letter from the Ikoyi Correctional Centre confirming that Ajudua had been admitted to the Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH), Idi-Araba, Lagos, for medical treatment.
Following this development, Ajudua’s counsel, Olalekan Ojo, SAN, presented a fresh bail application on behalf of the defendant.
However, the prosecuting counsel, Seidu Atteh, noted that he had not been served a copy of the letter from the Correctional Centre regarding the defendant’s medical status.
He informed the court that the business of the day was the continuation of trial and that the prosecution was fully prepared to proceed.
“We have two witnesses present in court and ready to testify; one travelled from Enugu, and the other from Port Harcourt,” Atteh said.
Justice Dada, however, adjourned the matter to Wednesday, July 30, 2025, for continuation of trial and hearing of the fresh bail application.
Ajudua is standing trial for allegedly defrauding a Palestinian national, Zad Abu Zalaf, of the sum of $1,043,000 (One Million, Forty-Three Thousand U.S. Dollars) under false pretenses.
The case, which began in 2005 before Justice M.O. Obadina of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, encountered several delays due to legal technicalities employed by the defendant that stalled the proceedings and complicated his arraignment.
The matter was subsequently reassigned to Justice J.E. Oyefeso and later to Justice M.A. Dada, before whom Ajudua was finally arraigned on June 4, 2018.
Following the denial of his bail by Justice Dada, Ajudua appealed to the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal, which granted him bail on September 10, 2018. Dissatisfied with the appellate court’s ruling, the EFCC appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Commission also filed a separate appeal with suit number SC/912C/2018 challenging the appellate court’s decision to transfer the case from Justice Dada to another judge to commence afresh (de novo).
Both issues were resolved in favour of the prosecution by the apex court which ordered Justice Dada to continue the trial of the case.
